Unlawfully obtained material is to be disclosed in family law action. H vs H (2015) IEHC 58 (High Court, Abbott J, January 23rd, 2015) The High Court, in family law proceedings, directs that one spouse return to the other spouse some documentary material that had been unlawfully obtained, but that the material should be formally disclosed in the proceedings, on the grounds that the need to make proper provision for the children of the marriage outweighs the court's concern about the unlawful means of obtaining the information.
– Conor O’Higgins BL
An assertion of legal privilege over discovered documents is upheld in an action concerning the sale of commercial property. Mac A'Bhaird vs Commissioner of Public Works in Ireland (2015) IEHC 129 (High Court, Keane J, February 6th, 015) The High Court rejects a challenge to an assertion of legal professional privilege over documents discovered in the course of an action concerning the sale of a commercial premises, being satisfied that the documents in issue were capable of attracting both litigation privilege and legal advice privilege and that, accordingly, the defendants' claim of legal professional privilege had been made out.
– Damian Byrne BL
A receiver was not in breach of their duty of care to property developers. Farrelly vs Kavanagh (2015) IEHC 114 (High Court, Costello J, February 25th, 2015) The High Court dismisses a claim by property developers against a receiver alleging negligence and defamation, where the developers had taken steps to prevent the sales of property by the receiver and there was no conflict of interest on the part of the receiver.
– Mark Tottenham BL
Receivers are entitled to possession of a property where the lease was granted in breach of a mortgage deed. Cotter vs Landscape House Golf and Leisure Ltd (2015) IEHC 128 (High Court, Keane J (David), February 25th, 2015) The High Court grants an order on the application of receivers that occupants vacate a property which they held under a lease that had been granted in breach of the borrower's mortgage deed and where no rent had been paid to the receivers, although they had offered to enter into an amended version of the original lease.
– Mark Tottenham
There was no breach by a bank of duty of care in lending money for the purchase of apartments in Corsica. Allied Irish Banks Plc vs Pierse (2015) IEHC 136 (High Court, Keane J, January 14th, 2015) The High Court grants a bank judgment on foot of loans to purchase blocks of apartments in Corsica, finding that the bank did not breach any duty of care that it owed to the defendant husband and wife and that consumer protection legislation did not apply to the defendants in this case as they were acting in the course of business.
– Damian Byrne A court did not have jurisdiction to order structured payments in a catastrophic injuries case. O'Neill vs National Maternity Hospital (2015) IEHC 160 (High Court, Barton J, March 10th, 2015) The High Court refuses to make an interim payment order in the assessment of damages for catastrophic injuries to a child caused by medical negligence, notwithstanding that the future care requirements of the child would be clearer after a 10-year period, on the grounds that there was no legislative basis to make periodic payments of the sort proposed.
– Mark Tottenham
Irish courts have no jurisdiction in respect of parental responsibility of child with habitual residence in Scotland. Child and Family Agency vs C.J IEHC 669 (High Court, O'Hanlon J, December 11th, 2014) The High Court, in proceedings concerning the welfare of a child whose habitual residence was in Scotland, grants a declaration that the courts of Ireland had no jurisdiction in respect of matters concerning parental responsibility for the child who was the subject of the proceedings.
– James Cross BL
A Nigerian-born Irish citizen is awarded damages for breaches of European law and of his right to a good name. Ogieriakhi vs Minister for Justice (2014) IEHC 582 (High Court, Hogan J, December 22nd, 2014) The High Court awards a Nigerian-born Irish citizen damages of €127,905 against the State for breach of European law and for breach of his constitutional right to a good name, on the grounds that the State had failed to correctly apply relevant European law granting him permanent residence on foot of his EU national wife's residence in the State for five years.
– James Cross The cross-examination of a witness on an affidavit in commercial proceedings would serve no useful purpose. Irish Bank Resolution Corporation Ltd vs Quinn (2015) IEHC 134 (High Court, McGovern J, February 13th, 2015) The High Court refuses leave to issue a motion requiring the attendance of the plaintiff's witness for cross-examination in respect of an affidavit tending to support claims that the defendants were seeking to put their assets beyond the reach of the plaintiffs, on grounds that: a) the defendants had not filed an affidavit challenging such information as a prerequisite for seeking leave and b), cross-examination would be irrelevant to the issues to be determined at trial and would serve no useful purpose in the case.
– Ian Fitzharris BL
The full text of each judgment can be found on courts.ie. These reports are provided by Stare Decisis Hibernia: staredecisishibernia.com. Stare Decisis Hibernia is a finalist in the Irish Law Awards 2015 in two categories: legal website of the year and service provider to the legal industry.